On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 13:03 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 11:37 -0700, Saul Wold wrote:
Signed-off-by: Saul Wold s...@linux.intel.com
---
.../puzzles/{puzzles_r9163.bb = puzzles_r9173.bb} |0
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
rename meta/recipes-sato/puzzles/{puzzles_r9163.bb = puzzles_r9173.bb}
(100%)
No doubt the patch is fine, but why is this recipe in oe-core at all?
It doesn't seem to fit any reasonable definition of core functionality
that I can immediately think of.
This is a discussion that the TSC had. Somehow we need the ensure we had
the ability to test oe-core easily and extensively and sato is a pretty
contained way to do that. Originally I'd expected sato to get split into
its own layer but we didn't do that for this reason.
Cheers,
Richard
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
